Apple (Tim Cook) vs the FBI, who's right and who's wrong?

[Nemesis]

So, as the subject heading suggests, you have probably heard or read that the FBI has requested Apple come up with a viable method of accessing the data on a terrorists iPhone without erasing it forever with invalid pin code guesses.

Depending on your views, you either absolutely believe that Apple should do the right thing, and provide a bespoke version of iOS for this one phone to enable access. Or you believe that Apple (& other Tech giants such as Google, Sony, Microsoft etc) are within their rights, as their business depends on the safety and privacy of personal data, to refuse the FBI/governments request.

This is a very interesting dilemma since Apple has until the 26th Feb to formally respond to the court order and what the FBI are asking for is no small thing. Effectively, creating a master key that could be used for all iPhones, not just this one phone, which if fell into the wrong hands, would mean that anybody/everybody that has an iPhone could be at risk from a nefarious individual who had access to this key. Considering the hacking of Sony, Microsoft and most recently TalkTalk, security of information is very important in maintaining consumer trust.

So, is Apple right to refuse in protecting consumers data or should they provide a bespoke version of iOS regardless of the potential risks?

[Elgin_McQueen]

It'd be one thing if they were simply being asked to unlock the phone, but am I right in understanding, they're actually asking Apple to create a way of hacking in to the phone? I mean, they're asking them to create something that doesn't actually exist for them. That's something they can't be asked to do, surely? It's not like they're asking for something they already have in their possession.

[Matt_B]

Yep. It's an understandable request for this particular case, but it would set a dangerous precedent to allow them to do this with anyone's phone. The consequences of this would be downright Orwellian.

The metadata alone, which they already have access to, should be more than enough for keeping tabs on terrorist suspects.

[Sel Feena]

Well done Apple, hope they stick to their guns on this.

[nokgod]

I don't understand the point of the FBI asking for this. All that will happen is that terrorists/people with stuff to hide will shift to an alternative phone/OS or communication method if Apple are forced to comply. Its just giving bad guys a heads up. Serves no useful purpose, imo and is just unworkable and plain stupid.

I've never had any particular love for apple but i hope they win this.

[The Beans]

Yep. It's an understandable request for this particular case, but it would set a dangerous precedent to allow them to do this with anyone's phone. The consequences of this would be downright Orwellian.

I agree with this, while at the same time being uncomfortable with a corporation effectively telling a government to get stuffed. It's going to be interesting to see how it all turns out.

[necronom]

I don't know the whole story on this, but couldn't Apple have one computer in the world in a secure room, with no internet access, that can be used to get into an iPad in extreme situations? A room with cameras, security codes, etc, that no-one could get into without many people knowing, and that access has been agreed on for a certain few individuals. I don't know how the encryption would be bypassed, but maybe they can be some secure way of doing this without it being open to hacking by the public.

[Antiriad2097]

This all seems a bit daft.

I assume the FBI tried to negotiate a contract and were going to pay Apple for their services?

Since they said no, can't they just hire some other coder/hacker to do it?

Of course the whole thing could be an act to get terrorists to move away from iOS (if apple lose) or onto iOS (if apple win), because the FBI already has what it needs and just wants to minimise the systems it monitors

[RodimusPrime]

If it was just a case of handing the phone over to apple and asking them to gain access to that one phone then I believe apple should do it.

However if, like some reports have said, the government are asking apple to provide them with a master key to unlock other phones then, No, no way in hell should apple do that.

[sscott]

I shoehorned it into an ICT lesson this week to cover privacy and encryption.

[Sel Feena]

What? Did you take the class bellend's phone and try to get into it?

[merman]

This all seems a bit daft.

I assume the FBI tried to negotiate a contract and were going to pay Apple for their services?

Since they said no, can't they just hire some other coder/hacker to do it?

Of course the whole thing could be an act to get terrorists to move away from iOS (if apple lose) or onto iOS (if apple win), because the FBI already has what it needs and just wants to minimise the systems it monitors

McAfee have apparently offered to help.

Apple (and Google) are right to stand up for privacy and encryption. They protect much more than they harm.

There's been a lot of misinformation about this case and how much happened online. Letting Governments have a back door into consumer tech is not the answer.

[Antiriad2097]

I dont see the harm in it either.

[pratty]

I dont see the harm in it either.

The potential abuse of this power by the government?

The governemnt asking to access a suspect's data is reasonable, but there is an issue of permission and the ownership of privacy, the governemnt should ask Apple and by extension the people for their permission to do this under specific circumstances as an exception to the otherwise rule of privacy. If the government has the potential to access any phone by default, then fundamentally the people's 'right' to privacy surely becomes a state given privilige instead, and with all the wider implications that comes with that.

[Antiriad2097]

Umm, I still have no problem with it. Privacy is overrated, protecting crooks more than anyone else.